tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1513704378254120283.post3838497042895582083..comments2024-01-23T13:58:48.688-08:00Comments on The Trenches of Discovery: Historical Transparency-washing?Shaun Hotchkisshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04832423210563130467noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1513704378254120283.post-68239921928465683122011-10-25T13:27:47.414-07:002011-10-25T13:27:47.414-07:00I've been thinking about the figurations of th...I've been thinking about the figurations of this post, in particular the pile of photographs and the metaphor of transparency. The photographs remind me of Eliot's "heap of broken images," and also of how Kracauer thinks the historiography of media: piles of photographs, whirling montage, both of which he likes because they just might break up all that frightening, illusionary transparency. <br /><br />And the very word 'transparent' connotes Adorno, in particular of "The Meaning of Working Through the Past." <br /> <br />It's scary that this project is so well framed by academic history. There's something perniciously elegant about the idea of transparency in relation to the historian's craft. History is not often (or never) actually transparent, orderly, narrative, teleological. Anyway, I'm curious if you would link the appearance of these kinds of books to the current political landscape in Europe.Michelle Menzieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04247049669215697236noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1513704378254120283.post-72262875151603840582011-10-19T06:00:47.787-07:002011-10-19T06:00:47.787-07:00To 1. Knowing that academic history is a disciplin...To 1. Knowing that academic history is a discipline plagued by the need to find fresh topics and also to find funding for research, I have to say that this Professor sort of got a golden egg - unseen archives and money to do the research. And now that it is in the public eye it will face the scrutiny of peer review. <br />Moreover, I haven't seen any reports yet that he has turned it into popular history but rather treated it in an academic way. So kudos. More to the point, I don't think he saw this as anything else than a good chance to do good research.<br /><br />To answer your questions, if I were offered such a commission, I would say yes. Why wouldn't you? If you do it right, you have little to lose. The public gains more knowledge and a small part of a dark corner of history is better understood - a dream for an historian.<br /><br />As for minimising the washing - difficult. Once you put the report/book/result in whatever form on the table, it is not really in your hands how it gets instrumentalised. And what you can say in interviews as supporting documentation is restricted by whatever tight clauses are in your contract.<br /><br />As it is, the washing is more a social expectation than anything else. With bad history it is new, but we know it from everyday. Like a hollywood star who gets arrested for possesion of narcotics: it gets admitted it was bad, they apologise, and instead of doing time like a criminal they go into rehab and donate money to the hospice or similar. Or a sportsman who is found to have doped. They apologise for getting caught and embarrassing their families, pay their fine, serve a ban of 1-2 years and win the Tour-de-France 2 years afterwards because all is forgiven. Moreso: all *must* be forgiven by the public, because the qrongdoers have done "all" in their power to move past the evil. Blame it on religious forgiveness or the media for liking rollercoaster stories and King Lear-esque falls and and later triumphs. <br /><br />To 2) I'll get back to you when I have a more qualified answer.dialmformetcalfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02051398763732989794noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1513704378254120283.post-55953282229252912922011-10-19T02:00:56.172-07:002011-10-19T02:00:56.172-07:00I have some questions:
1) The moral situation for...I have some questions:<br /><br />1) The moral situation for the Quandts seems relatively straightforward. What they've done is naughty, even if a little bit clever. However for the historian it seems much more ambiguous. One on level, maybe he has undermined history as an academic discipline (i.e. how transparent and unbiased can he be when he is working under commission). On the other hand he was able to access historical documents no other historian would have and he has brought history into the public eye. So it isn't clear that his role in the transparency-washing is as clearly wrong. As you indicate, he may even be unwitting of his role in the washing. My question then is, what would you do Matt, if you, as a historian, had been offered the commission? Would you take it? And if so, how would you try to minimise the amount of washing that came out of it.<br /><br />2) If it had been proven that the Quandts' parents/grandparents had obtained wealth through devious 3rd Reichian means, what would Germany have done about it? Would it just be infamy that resulted, or are there descendants of concentration camp survivors who might get compensation, or would the government impose a fine? (i.e. what was actually at stake for the Quandts in this research? How far could they have fallen if something bad had actually been uncovered?)Shaun Hotchkisshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04832423210563130467noreply@blogger.com